1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant rendered the Incheon District Court Decision 2013Na3481 Decided July 18, 2013 with respect to C.

1. On the basis of the executory exemplification of the judgment stated in Paragraph 2 of the Disposition against C (the Plaintiff’s wife) with respect to the movable property stated in the attached attachment list (hereinafter “instant movable property”) in the case of Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, 309 Dong 1202 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on May 20, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 through 14 (including each number), 16 through 22, and 24 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the apartment of the instant corporeal movables was owned by the Plaintiff. At the time of the execution of the above seizure, the Plaintiff and E were residing in the instant apartment with the former husband, and the Plaintiff and E were directors of the instant apartment before February of the execution of the above seizure. Prior to the execution of the seizure, from February of 2012, the Plaintiff resided in the instant apartment Nos. 504, 201 (hereinafter “H apartment”), which were newly purchased the instant corporeal movables under the name of the Plaintiff and the director of the instant apartment around July 27, 2012, each of the following facts that the Plaintiff purchased the instant corporeal movables and the instant corporeal movables purchased the instant apartment under the name of the Plaintiff’s head office and the Plaintiff’s 31,201, and thus, the Plaintiff did not recognize the relationship between the Plaintiff’s and the Plaintiff No. 231631, respectively.